Inkless Wells

 Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

You don't protect freedom by confiscating it

by Paul Wells on Friday, November 26, 2010 8:28am - 90 Comments

What an excellent column in this morning’s New York Times by Roger Cohen, the paper’s only foreign-affairs columnist who can still surprise readers with his choice of topic or improve their day with the elegance of his prose. (Was that a dig at the others? Why yes it was.) The topic is airport scanners and pat-downs. Cohen makes his own points best, but to sum up, he says they’re (1) humiliating; (2) counterproductive; (3) precisely what the terrorists wanted, beyond the immediate slaughter: to hobble the enemy for the very long term.

There’s been a debate around Ottawa about whether Michael Ignatieff was serious this week when he was scrummed about these issues. All I know is, he missed a chance to make these arguments, so by my lights he was about as serious as John Baird ever gets.

Tags: , ,
Bookmark and Share
  • YYZ

    Cohen hits on one of my (many) issues with the security process > it's ridiculously inefficient and represents the proverbial needle-in-a-haystack attempt at security.

    Even if you agree that $X-billion needs to spent on airport security (I don't) I firmly believe you could spend the money in many other ways that are both more efficient, effecitve and far less intrusive on law-abiding travelers.

  • Dot

    When a 20 something Chinese kid can board an Air Canada flight wearing a rubber mask that reminded me of standup comic Leonard Barr, can silicone enhanced strap/glue on body parts that fool even the most discerning gropers be far off?

    • Patchouli

      Exploding silicone breasts!

      • Dot

        The Unaboober.

        • DerekPearce

          Wouldn't it be the Duoboober?

  • bergkamp

    "So I give thanks this week for the Fourth Amendment: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures …. "

    I agree, good column. Reading the fourth ammendment at the end, it made me think that someone is surely going to challenge in court whether government agents touching your junk will qualify as unreasonable.

    And I would add one point to article: changes are mostly ineffectual. All the changes to American screening process would not have stopped foreign terrorists coming into America. Abdulmutallab, for whom these changes were made, boarded plane in Amsterdam and was headed for Detroit.

    • MostlyCivil

      Indeed. Seems more like a "feel good" response than an actual security measure.

      That said, the fourth amendment pretty much withered and blew away once the patriot act showed up…

      • Keith in Brampton

        Isn't that a "feel up" response?

    • madeyoulook

      A rebuttal of the fourth amendment argument might be that you are free NOT to travel by commercial civilian airline. If you know that you might be subject to these "enhanced search techniques" then you have freely made the choice to run this risk by presenting yourself at the security desk of the airport.

      I do not like that rebuttal myself, but I suppose there is a chance such an argument might win the day.

      What worries me more are the persuasive charges that these "security" measures will lead to many more deaths than they would ever save, because the population will now hit the roads in far greater numbers to avoid this degrading charade, and automobile travel is ongoing (but headline-avoiding) carnage.

      • YYZ

        I'm not a lawyer – but I'm fairly certain that in America you cannot make a law that allows citizens to waive their constitutional rights. There are limitations of course > eg, the right to bear arms does not extend to sitting in a courtroom pointing a gun at a judge.

        Interestingly, the fourth amendment isn't a "right to" it's a "right against" or a prohibition on having something bad infringed on a person. My read: only amendments 3, 4, 8, 24 are in this category and only the 4th (search and seizure) and the 8th (cruel and unusual) are comparable. The debates on these amendments are not usually limiting their appicability but rather, on what defines "cruel & unusual" or "unreasonable search & seizure."

        cont'd…

        • YYZ

          …

          I'm not aware of any precedent allowing limitations on these amendments >> save Gitmo which probably limits both >> (although I'm not a legal scholar and would be curious to know if these exist). If junk-touching searches without probable cause were defined as unreasonable search & seizure, I'm not sure it would be legally possible to place restrictions limiting this right without amending the constitution.

      • bergkamp

        "A rebuttal of the fourth amendment argument might …. "

        I was wondering about this myself but did not have time to google earlier.

        Now I have a few free minutes and have found this:

        "The border search exception is a doctrine of United States criminal law that exempts searches of travelers and their property from the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement …… However, customs may only conduct searches of the traveler's body — including strip, body cavity, involuntary x-ray, and in some jurisdictions, pat-down searches — if the Customs officer has reasonable suspicion to believe the traveler is concealing contraband." Wiki, Border Search Exemption

        I have no idea what it means for latest controversy, tho. If the issue is not already decided, I assume some org will be challenging this.

  • bepele

    There are advantages to being poor. I don't have to worry about those things. I don't cross borders or pass through airports.

    • http://stumblingabordeaux.blogspot.com Pato31

      Whatever, I'm poor too, but the reason is I spend all my money doing exactly that – crossing borders and passing through airports. Got me the travel bug.

    • s_c_f

      Whether or not it affects you now, you should still have an opinion. Flights in the US are cheap, you might find yourself with the money sometime.

  • Sigh

    Serious or joking, Ignatieff was completely tone deaf on this one.

    • Passing by

      Agreed. I was actually shocked by his dismissive reaction.

      I wish it wasn't so, but when it comes to civil liberties, I fear that Ignatieff may actually be to the right of Harper, who is at least a quasi-libertarian.

      • Emily

        I agree with both of you. His remarks showed he is politically tone deaf, and cavalier as well.

      • Mike514

        when it comes to civil liberties, I fear that Ignatieff may actually be to the right of Harper

        Interesting thought. I'll have to mull that one over for a bit, as I've never really thought about it in great detail. Any other examples of why you think that way?

        • Aberhart

          He based his late academic career on the premise that torture is a "necessary evil"…

  • Fido

    Why is this about Ignatieff anyway — his witless wittiness aside?

  • Loraine Lamontagne

    I was on a Munich-Zurich flight, early in 1973, where all passengers were shown to private rooms, asked to get naked and put on a hospital gown. Thus dressed I waited, imagining that some Brunhilde might come in – and she did. A huge German woman with blond tresses gave me a full body check and checked all my clothes and purse.

    It must be because I've gone through this experience that I find the body scanners inoffensive. However, I still find politically-charged ten-percenters, marketing phone calls and pollsters phone calls received at my private residence to be an intrusion of my privacy.

    • MostlyCivil

      "A huge German woman with blond tresses gave me a full body check"

      Wait, are you sure that isn't a pay-per-view channel?

    • Dot

      When I was in my mid twenties, I backpacked (amongst other countries) through Turkey, Syria, Jordan, West Bank, Israel, Egypt. As a tourist I was constantly stopped, asked for ID, had my baggage searched when entering buildings etc (as were many locals). When flying EL-AL from Tel Aviv to Amsterdam, I got pulled aside, got padded down -had to lower my pants (not strip underwear) and got "special" security clearance. Sure, I was a bit offended by being singled out, but I just figured it was the cost of traveling in that region.

      When the PM of Canada had not traveled outside of N. America /UK by the time he got to office, can one not expect his lack of int'l experience to taint his opinions?

    • Pierre N. Ontario

      Well, if you like scanners, I hope that in 10 or 20 years, when you come down with some weird disease that makes your "junk" turn green and fall off…. or when your children are born and all look like the Monster from the Black Lagoon…
      That you still like them as much.
      You may even like them even more, when you discover the plane you are on is headed vertically straight down for the ground at 400 miles an hour, despite the fact that everyone got scanned.
      NOT, repeat NOT that I would wish any of these terrible things happening to you!

  • Fido

    Rapiscan — add an " E " judisiously and it morphs into something truly sinister.

  • Patchouli

    Is it at least a well-hung jury?

    • SamDavies

      If so, I wonder if people are touching them all day long?

  • BGLong

    Mr. Fallows (and many others) have been in this game for a while …

    http://www.theatlantic.com/james-fallows/tsa/?cid…

    And, analysis and logic against a big-money politically-connected growth industry and
    politically useful scare mongering … as a dedicated follower of lost causes, where do
    I sign up for that ?

    • Inkless

      See Dan Gardner, Table 2.

      • BGLong

        Thanks, but the brilliance would hurt my eyes. I prefer shadowy,shifty characters.

  • Mike514

    I recall reading on a blog (can't recall which one – perhaps on Macleans?) that Israel's airport security uses a "wand" waved around a person (kind of like handheld metal detectors used at airports), that detects explosive materials. Apparently very sophisticated and accurate.

    Shouldn't we be exploring such cutting-edge, non-intrusive security measures, rather than (seemingly) just copying whatever the US does?

    • YYZ

      <sarcasm> Hey man, no WAND will stop the terrorists from bringing plastic/liquid explosives on board. Is this your first day? </sarcasm>

    • Jan

      The Russians have bred dogs (part dingo) that can detect minute amounts of explosive. I'd trust them over this scanning/patting nonsense anyday. Toews has basically ceded our sovereignty on this to the US. The new British government is standing up to it.

      • briguyhfx

        "A dingo ate my explosive undergarments!"

  • Jeff

    Ignatieff has lost all credibility. If this is how he acts in opposition on such a fundamental issue of democracy, what will happen when his decisions actually have an impact? Count me among the 70% of people who believe a change of leader in the Liberal Party is in order.

    • Patchouli

      Oh, Jeff, calm down: this is just a tiny ill-thought comment. The guy deserves a run at an election. Every time leaders are changed, the party is in flux; as Liberal, I'd rather avoid the flux for a year or so. Give him a chance — lord knows there are rivers of worse comments running through this land.

    • Emily

      Just as long as it's not Bob Rae….he's just as bad.

  • YYZ

    Aside: I like the style diversity in the New York Times columnists. Do I love 'em all? Of course not. But when you piece them all together it's a pretty good portfolio. I find that Brooks and Douthat have good analysis but their conclusions sometimes don't follow the analysis. I find Krugman's analysis and corresponding conclusions excellent but he does not allow for what happens in the real world. I find Kristof rational. I find Dowd funny (name ONE funny Canadian columnist). Friedman has become a bit of an agenda-pusher but his columns are ALWAYS well researched and reported (we lack that in Canada too).

    As a team, they have a bench that is by far superior to anything we have here (which one would hope given the talent they have to draw on).

    All in my opinion of course. As an avid Times reader, just curious where your major criticisms lie.

    • kcm

      Name on funny Canadian columnist: Steyn…funny indifferent was to different people of course. But not a columnist. You may be right.

  • Crit_Reasoning

    Chris Selley sums up the serious portion of Ignatieff's scrum:

    My amateur advice all along has been to turn the man loose — let him speak his mind, because he has one and because the retail approach wasn’t working. But if all he’s got to say is “shut up and be scanned,” forget it. Stick to the talking points.

    http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/11/25/ch…

    • Dot

      Why does his opinion carry any more weight than yours, for example?

      • Crit_Reasoning

        I'm quoting Selley here because I find his points compelling and well-written, and because I agree with most of what he wrote. That's a pretty good reason to quote someone.

        • Dot

          Did you at all factor in the fact that Iggy was in a scrum, and Chris, whatever Toronto cubbyhole he hangs out in,while in constant contact with fellow twitters, took a full 24 hrs+ to come up with his pearls of wisdom?

          • Crit_Reasoning

            That's pretty much how punditry works, right? Those who write opinions for a living have the luxury of being able to think through what they're going to say, while politicians in a scrum often find themselves in the unenviable position of having to think on their feet.

            What's your point? Are you saying that it's unfair for newspaper opinion writers to criticize politicians for stuff they say in scrums? Because I'd have to disagree quite strongly with you there.

          • Dot

            My point? Again, I believe I have brought this up with you before, context is important.

            You know, some of the politician's (and other individual's who put themselves forward to serve publicly in some capacity) harshest critics, I'd like to see scrummed. In fact, I'd like to scrum some myself – better still, put them before committee and I'd like to quote back some of their comments and ask them to explain.

            I've seen Selley once on a program – he appeared with Wells on TVO's Agenda. When Paikin asked him where he derived his opinions from , he suggested he relied wholeheartedly on the "reporting" of Wells. Don't they all?

            Piling on is easy, when you can quote someone else. Adding value – that's different.

    • Emily

      LOL good point.

      I think the 'I talk like I'm one of the people' routine, is a dead loss….but the 'shut up and be scanned' dismissal just produces outrage.

  • Claudia Lemire

    The terrorists have won, I can't believe we are being subjected to this kind stupid search, and Ignatieff is an idiot, what an stupid thing to say " I have my private parts touched all day long ".

    What am I supposed to teach my children? Oh, honey NO ONE touches your private parts except if you want to become PM.

    • Dot

      Well, you are certainly consistent with your oft repeated "Ignatieff is an idiot" meme.

      • Claudia Lemire

        I wish I could have a different opinion, I am disappointed, I guess I expected to much from him!

  • kcm

    . "During the Bosnian war, besieged Sarajevans had a word — “inat” — for the contempt-cum-spite they showed barbarous gunners on the hills by dressing and carrying on as normal. Inat is what Americans should show the jihadist cave-dwellers"

    My own view is the fact that N Americans have had little or no experience with direct terrorism [ a blessing no doubt] is largely the reason for all the fear. [ that and too much love of a buck - Rapiscan & company]
    I grew up i the UK when the troubles were a daily fact of life. [ much much worse in N Ireland of course] One of the favoured terror tactics was bombing the local bozzer. Anyone familiar with Britain knows the sacred value of this institution. While the stakes are immeasurably igher now, it was not given the level of security scrutiny as are airports now – it was seen as a mark of defiance to still go for a pint whenever. Managing the risks to zero is not the way to go, people have feel they wont be cowered. Having said that the stakes are so much higher now. I wouldn't like to be the one making these decisions.

  • http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/ Open_Democracy

    Not only have the terrorists won, the manufacturers of nail clippers have also been beneficiaries of the screening process. Somewhere in the deep dark recesses of Canadian airports there lies a treasure trove of deadly fingernail scissors, small screwdrivers, half-used tubes of toothpaste and hair gel. Perhaps the feds should consider auctioning off these items and put the money toward the federal deficit.

    Prior to boarding an El Al flight 20 years ago, my wife was subjected to a "boob honk" by female security personnel. I guess they were just ahead of their time.

    As an aside, if you think that the pre-board screening is not particularly comfortable, wait until these become the "assiette de vol du jour":

    http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2010/10/worl…

  • P_M

    "Kristof and the economics guy are forgettable."

    WTF is wrong with you? You take Friedman's economics seriously and ignore Krugman? I don't have words.

    • Inkless

      Don't sell yourself short. "WTF is wrong with you?" are some pretty good words.

  • YYZ

    Interesting. These basically are the columnists I grew up on so perhaps I have a lower bar (thankfully they got rid of Bill Kristol).

    Your point about Douthat is spot on and I hadn't thought of it.

    Thanks.

  • Kaplan

    I totally agree with you on Friedman, and there are enough Friedman-spoofing sites and articles out there that make a better case against him than I could here (although occasionally he turns out a good one).

    Cohen, too, has been great, and as something of a Balkan's specialist, I've drawn on his work and books from the area regularly.

    I can take or leave Dowd and Herbert, although I admire the tenacity of Herbert's work.

    However, I think Krugman's an essential read, and I don't know why you'd dismiss him as "forgettable," but I'm sure you've a well-reasoned answer for that one. He's been an absolute necessary voice of sanity during the economic crisis, and has nicely reasoned (oh, and researched) columns that point out some of the sheer insanity of the Republicans and the Tea Party. He's also critical of the Obama administration as well, which at least demonstrates some inward reflection.

    Kristoff, too, has done some amazing work on democracy and freedom in China and Africa – so again, I don't get the cavalier dismissal from you, although I'm sure your heartbreaking journey though Perimeter's heart of darkness stands up nicely against his work examining poverty, prostitution, and genocide. Maybe check out his Wikipedia page for a primer on his reporting accomplishments.

    As for Douthat, I was shocked – shocked, I tell's ya – when the Times gave him a column. I couldn't figure it out, but as the months have rolled by, I see I'm not alone in my ongoing disappointment in his work, or lack thereof.

  • bill_y

    I just do not get why people are so freaked out about this.

    Being groped is a part of life now for those who fly alot, and it is a price to pay to prevent another underwear bomber from boarding a plane. Yes, shut up and be scanned, if you want to say it that way…

    It is not the worse think that could happen…

    I am all for civil liberites , but we are doing our best to try and protect own saftey – do we have it exactly right? I dunno… maybe we could do better, but if someone has to touch my junk as part of our collective security…. its not such a big deal.

    • Halo_Override

      I am all for civil liberties

      No, actually, you aren't.

      • bill_y

        We are not talking about water boarding here…. and, yes, I am all for civil liberties, thank you very much. They do however have to be balanced with collective responsibilities.

        • Aberhart

          Drawing the 'line' of civil liberties at physical torture clearly shows the limitations you are willing to place on such freedoms over "collective responsibilities."

    • Lee_JD

      I have this rock for sale. It keeps away tigers, I swear…

      • Another Guest

        I'll take it! Hah, damn tigers won't know what hit 'em when I unleash the rock…

    • danby

      Help is a phone call away

      PS: the picture is beautiful

      • Lee_JD

        Awesome.

    • Lee_JD

      My problem with pat-downs and strip searches (besides the gross infringement on civil liberty) is that they don't work and are unnecessary.

      For example, there are over 10,000 deaths by drunk driving (every year!) in the US. Should we install ignition interlocks on every car? That would eliminate those deaths.

      There have been bus bombings, train bombings, school shootings, and so forth but we don't search people at all in those areas.

      Terrorism only works if you're terrorized; statistically speaking you should be more afraid of ladders than air terrorism because ladders kill a hell of a lot more people (and we don't have a ladder registry or mandated ladder training before you can use one so why the ridiculousness at airport security?).

  • Guest

    Bill_Y I don't think you understand the entire issue is also about KEEPING civil liberties intact for the future.
    Sheep like you don't know the difference between grope-raped and true freedom.
    I guess you'll enjoy rectal exams in public once some nutcase smuggles something up there and the
    next step after complete loss of liberty will be…yeah….up the dirts-hoot with a stranger's germy rubber glove.

    • bill_y

      Sorry Guest,,,, you have presented two logical fallicies in your remark.

      A) I am not a sheep (baaa) and
      B) you present a slippery slope argument. It is not true that because I support the existing situation that I will support something much worse.

      O, and you are exagerating – no one is being raped.

  • Mike

    So prison inmates shouldn't have cells searched? Metal detectors should be removed from court houses? You're putting yourself on in airline's multi-million property and possibly crossing international borders. If some of these measures were not in place would you be comfortable sitting beside someone with an 11" hunting knife? The measures are OK, debate is welcome but anyone embarrassed by a pat down needs to realize that no one cares. You're not going to have people point and laugh because you got pat down. Private screening rooms are available if YOU care so much.
    The "randomizer" eliminates profiling (by selecting individuals for secondary screening at random) and anyone who decides to wear their rhinestoned Ed Hardy shirt or feels hassled by having to remove their watch or shoes for 1 minute deserves to be reminded that rules have been established with political and public support. If you don't like fish I wouldn't suggest the Salmon.

    • JimD

      Mike, a prison inmate is in jail because THEY HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME YOU MORON. The freedom from unreasonable search and seizure (i.e. searching someone and/or confiscating their property when they have given the law no justifiable reason to do so) is one of the foundations of a free society. That is a natural law, and trumps any law that our politicians and their bought-and-paid-for mainstream media have duped the masses into supporting.

  • Emily

    I agree totally.

    "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety, and will lose both." Benjamin Franklin

    And the 'terrorists'?
    http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoons/KeefeM/2…

    I'm also disgusted with Ignatieff and his cavalier dismissal of it all.

    Again he had a chance to lead….and didn't.

  • tobyornotoby

    It's a good column but I do doubt the sincerity of security officials who seem to be engaged in the appearance of security rather than actually attending to real risk.

    For instance, while virtually all air passengers are subject to some form of scanning or search, and everyone's name goes on a list, the vast majority of shipping containers that arrive at US (and Canadian) ports aren't even scanned, let alone opened and inspected. Other than self-reporting by shipping companies, we have no idea what is in those containers zooming through our cities.

    Apparently shampoo and underwear size bombs are more of a threat than bombs the size of a tractor trailer.

  • Dot

    Yeah, but you still believe Ed Sullivan showed great leadership by televising Elvis only from the waste up.

  • danby

    I'm not disgusted with Mr Ignatieff's comments; to me he was making a joke, that's all. It was just an icebreaker, but it did little to endear him to…. well….. pretty much anyone. But it's said and done.
    What is disappointing to me is that he had the chance to lay down some subtle groundwork to differentiate himself from the tough law and order stance taken by the Conservatives. He could have spoken eloquently about the need for security, but also the need to preserve freedoms and to not succumb to the obvious trap of overreacting to the threat of a terror attack. Yes, it would be a fine line to walk and would require philosophical forethought – but that's what leaders do – make us look at a bigger picture beyond the next mud fight in QP.
    He could have used the security issues at the G8/20 as an obvious parallel.
    He could have contrasted it with the argument that cancelling the mandatory long form census was an overreaction to a privacy concern. He could have been gathering threads together to coalesce into a sound alternative to the conservatives.
    Roger Cohen wrote a challenging, thought provoking piece. Fresh air smells good, doesn't it.
    Mr Ignatieff needs to get his head out of the polls, (and perhaps even his arse) and start to write one of his own.
    I'm guessing that there are a lot of Canadians who would be happy (and relieved) to read it.

  • Emily

    Serious topic, Dot. No place for jokes.

  • Dot

    So says the supposedly fan of George Carlin.

  • MostlyCivil

    The Internet is Serious Business. No laughies.

  • Emily

    Nothing wrong with laughs….silly and untrue stories are another matter.

  • PeterboroDave

    Excellent points, Danby. I WAS disgusted with Ignatieff, but it was downgraded to "completely unimpressed". I'm closer to Emily than to Dot on this one. He had an excellent chance to differentiate themselves on this topic, but chose not to. Typical Grit? Beats me.

  • Dot

    I'm closer to Emily than to Dot on this one.

    To the point of obsession?

    "When you lose your sense of humour, the terrorists win."

  • Emily

    I was disgusted because he seems to have a permanent case of foot-in-mouth. As Danby posts, he could have said a lot of things….useful, pointed, inspiring… even witty things.

    Instead he chose to say something that's dropped like an anvil everywhere.

    Basically it was, 'I don't care'.

    Personally I hope that some senior Libs get together soon, and insist on a one-way ticket to anywhere for Iggy.

  • Dot

    Have you ever traveled outside of the comforts of N. America?

  • Pierre N. Ontario

    Well he (Ziggy Iggy) REALLY DOESN'T CARE.
    (Neither does Stevie Wonder, Jumping Jack, Sarah the Queen, Obi Wan Obama, HRH & her broooode, etc….)
    WHY?
    Because NO ONE will EVER pat them down, grope them, scan them, or "wham bam thank you ma'am 'em".
    Get it?
    They don't give a "dam-a-mam" about these issues.
    It is just like a recent former POTUS, who, when he saw a laser scanner in a supermarket, was befuddled. He'd never been supermarket shopping. He'd never heard of laser scanners.
    This, IS "The Problem" with our "So Called Leaders".
    They have NO connection to the real world.
    Hence, this is why they cannot solve real world problems.
    Look at "Dalton the Kitten Eater" McGuinty. (R, C, TM)
    Hydro rates are going through the roof. Does he elect to help the working poor like me? NO!
    He uses 4 (count 'em 4 letters) to send me $130 (I was promised $200)!
    First, I get an application letter. Then, I get a confirmation letter.
    Then, I get one cheque for $65 in Nov 2010, and another cheque for $65 in Feb. 2011 !!!!
    He's Nickel and Diming me to death, as if he was a cheap Elgin street hooker !
    It is a well known fact that it cost $10 to send any business letter, whether you be IBM, or Joe's Confectionery. or ANY level of government. (Paper, ink, envelopes, time, postage, etc, all cost money.)
    So Uncle Dalton just spent $40 to send me my first $65 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    The man is a complete simpleton. He almost makes "Brian the Lye-on" look good!!!!
    The whole idea of HELPING people is ALIEN to these people!
    They only know how to help themselves!
    McGuinty could have used the Income Tax form, ONT-T1C, the pink colored Ontario Tax Credits Form,
    and sent out $40+65+65 or $170. Or, he could have sent $240 which would be what I would expect.
    BUT THEY HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO DO ORDINARY STUFF!
    How do you expect the bimbos who are running the TSA to be any better????

  • PeterboroDave

    I got IT! I GOT IT.

    Ignatieff has come out in favour of full anal probe-y thing (or something to that effect)- this will cleverly enable John Baird and the rest of the talking puppets to paint him as a security reactionary THEREFORE, commencing on Monday, the Conservatives will begin the process of ratcheting down CATSA security. By Wednesday of next week we'll be back to simple magnetometers and luggage scans and the Tories will have the ads on TV saying, "Michael Ignatieff: Just visiting to probe your anus and fondle your children. Can he be trusted with the economy?"

    HA HA- Ignatieff is playing chess while……oh never mind.

  • Emily

    I think Tiddley-winks is a more likely game. LOL

  • Dot

    Have you ever traveled outside of the comforts of N. America?

    None response = no.

    Didn't think so. But, I bet you can easily rhyme off the differences between a Jersey and a Guernsey.

  • Emily

    I don't know what your problem is Dot, but I've had enough of your silly attacks.

    You are on ignore.

  • Dot

    Woohoo!

    If you can't stand the ßeat, get out of the ßitchen.

  • Jan

    Or what's in the cargo of a plane we're travelling in.

Previous

Next

From Macleans